Nanotechnology has been one of the most exciting and dangerous forms of technological innovation. One element of this is to have autonomous computing devices linked with biological organisms, helping to direct them and move them according to commands entered into a computer. Much of this research is near completion, and experimental models already exist. The goal is to be able to create artificial cells that could then be manipulated and regenerated from outside.
Another important and potentially revolutionary trend in technology is the combination of DNA strands for use in microchips. The purpose here is to create self-assembling machines that are already programmed to complete tasks, as well as to think and be self-regulating and self-maintaining. Several major firms are currently perfecting prototypes.
The above represent the two foundational trends in technological innovation that will affect all others. Their benefits are said to include highly efficient machines that use little power and eliminate pollution. In addition, they are said to be able to provide cheap power and make useful technologies small, cheap and unobtrusive. Proponents of these developments claim that medications will become more powerful and work directly on diseased cells, replacing cancer cells, for example, with new, artificial ones. Life will be prolonged since cellular degeneration can easily be arrested through nanotechnologies.
When atomic energy was being theorized, it was lionized as an endless source of clean energy. As it turned out, it can also destroy the planet and is not so clean after all. The firms that are developing these new technologies have every incentive to promote the purely theoretical benefits for mankind and not deal with its equally theoretical detriments. While artificial cells may assist cancerous or otherwise damaged cells (allegedly without causing any other damage or complications), they can also serve as means of control and surveillance. The use of DNA in computer chips may create dangers of super-powered machines that serve themselves rather than society.
One of the central problems in these foundational trends is who is in control of their development, use and regulation. History tends to show that it is not the state, not moral suasion and certainly not the family that controls such innovations, but rather the scientific establishment working in tandem with corporate capital to make these trends seem sexy and useful. Modern technologies have largely been imposed on a society that has its culture changed radically whether one wants it or not. Is there any reason to believe that this next generation will be any different?